Iran - A Declaration of Independence
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for the Iranian people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with their Mullah establishment and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of Iran; and such is now the necessity which constrains it to alter its former System of Government. The history of the present Leader of the Revolution is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over Iran’s provinces. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Majlis to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the province remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Basij forces and the Revolutionary Guards independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us out of reach of constitutional oversight to be tried for pretended offences:
For supporting terrorist groups in neighboring nations, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these provinces.
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of Lebanese Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Arab Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. An Ayatollah, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Mullah brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the Republic of Iran, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these provinces, solemnly publish and declare, That these united provinces are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the Leader or the Revolution, the Guardian Council, and the Assembly of Experts, and that all political connection between them and the Mullah establishment, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
- nima's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 732 reads
****
Monday, July 06, 2009
THE IRANIAN ‘REVOLUTION’ HAS FAILED SO IT’S BACK TO THE ‘IRAN HAS NUCLEAR WEAPONS’ RHETORIC TO BOMB THEM INTO ‘REGIME CHANGE’.
With the failure of the Western powers to ferment/twitter a popular uprising after the 12 June elections in Iran that they hoped would lead to regime change, the West has now had to return to the ‘Iran has nuclear weapons’ meme in order to pave the way for an attack against Iran in the hope that regime change can be affected that way.
In an interview on Sunday, Vice-President Joe Biden, when asked, “…if the Israelis decide Iran is an existential threat, they have to take out the nuclear program, militarily the United States will not stand in the way?” responded saying: “Look, we cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do when they make a determination, if they make a determination that they're existentially threatened and their survival is threatened by another country.”
Biden was then asked: “You say we can't dictate, but we can, if we choose to, deny over-flight rights here in Iraq. We can stand in the way of a military strike”, to which he responded, “I'm not going to speculate… on those issues, other than to say Israel has a right to determine what's in its interests, and we have a right and we will determine what's in our interests.”
http://lataan.blogspot.com/2009/07/iranian-revolution-has-failed-so-its....
--
It is obvious that the Iranians have no rights nor interests to determine (According to international law.) according to self proclaimed Zionist Biden. (Who is the same one that supplied the USA with the Patriot act out of pure Patriotism.)
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
http://www.muslimedia.com/iran_analysis_electZB.htm
"Analysis of Iran's presidential elections
By Zafar Bangash
Iran - presidential candidatesIran’s presidential elections held on June 12 in which the incumbent, President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, retained his post with a wide margin over his nearest rival Mir Hussain Mousavi has provided the Muslim-hating West another opportunity to spout its anti-Islamic venom. Through its corporate-controlled media mouthpieces, they had already declared Mousavi the winner even before the people of Iran had had an opportunity to cast their vote. When the result turned out to be contrary to their perceived wisdom, it was immediately denounced as “rigged”. It seems even Mousavi had fallen for this propaganda because as soon as the polls closed, he told a press conference in Tehran that he had “won”. How he could make such a claim when no results had come in?
When the first results started to trickle in late on Friday June 12 and showed Ahmedinejad leading by a wide margin, the Western media, led by the BBC News World Service started to question their authenticity. Others followed suit. Soon there was a flood of accusations that there must have been massive rigging otherwise how could Ahmedinejad be ahead by such a wide margin. This was based on the Western media’s own wishful thinking of Mousavi’s victory. Part of the reason for their failure to accurately read the mood in Iran is due to the fact that Western journalists stay at Five-Star hotels—Isteqlal, Azadi and others—located in North Tehran. It is in this part of the city that the taghutis and other parasites of Iranian society live. Physically, these people may live in their mansions in North Tehran but mentally they are in Europe or North America—destinations they frequently visit. Such people feed their prejudices to Western reporters who need little prodding, based on their equally jaundiced view of the Islamic Republic, to reflect the most negative stereotyped images of Iran.
Some examples may help explain the point. In the weeks leading to the June 12 election, the overriding theme in Western media reporting was that most people would “boycott” the polls because they have “no faith” in the system. As the election campaign generated excitement, especially with televised debates between candidates, the Western media’s tune changed; their coverage started to focus on the “huge crowds” Mousavi was attracting and deliberately ignored the even larger crowds attending Ahmedinejad’s rallies. Media outlets that bothered to report Ahmedinejad’s rallies dismissed them as “rented crowds”. The largely ignorant Western public did not know the difference; besides, they had little interest in Iran’s elections. Their knowledge of Iran is based on the drivel fed to them by their own media: it is “building” a nuclear bomb and Ahmedinejad has threatened to “wipe out Israel”. Such prejudices are reinforced by the Iranian expatriate community that is largely opposed to the Islamic revolution, hence their decision to live outside Iran. Supporters of the revolution went back to Iran to help the Islamic Republic.
Western media reports started to speculate that Mousavi would win. Besides, their hatred of Ahmedinejad, the plucky Iranian President who drew rings around them with his masterful interviews, did not allow them to see that he may have support among the Iranian masses. President Ahmedinejad has maintained a level of modesty and simplicity that has earned him respect not only among Iranians but also Muslims worldwide. They saw in him a truly Islamic leader. The more the West hated and ridiculed him, the more the ordinary people of Iran admired him. But his popularity was not merely based on sentiment; he had promised during his first presidential campaign in 2005 that he would put Iran’s oil wealth on the tables of the poor. And this he did. He delivered this wealth to the Iranian masses in the rural areas where the majority resides. This majority had been ignored and dismissed by the liberals, reformists and other Western-doting Iranians. But they made the mistake of being taken in by the hangers-on from within the taghuti crowd in Tehran. Regrettably, it appears even Mousavi’s campaign has been infiltrated by such people despite the fact that during his tenure as prime minister (1981-1989), Mousavi was liked by the people because of his modest demeanour and able handling of the economy. It must also be pointed out that Mousavi was never elected to public office; he was appointed prime minister by Imam Khomeini (at that time, there were two offices: that of president and prime minister. Only the president was elected who then appointed the prime minister). In a constitutional amendment in 1989, the prime minister’s post was abolished and all executive powers were united in the office of the president.
Mousavi’s supporters have questioned the wide margin of Ahmedinejad’s victory. They were expecting that there would be a run off election because no single candidate would garner the 50 percent plus one vote as required by the constitution. This was again based on wishful thinking and the fact that Mousavi drew huge crowds in Tehran. Two days before elections, Ahmedinejad cancelled an appearance at one of his campaign rallies in Tehran because the crowd was so massive that he feared people might get trampled in a stampede. Few media outlets reported this nor did they report the huge victory rally Ahmedinejad held on June 14 in Tehran. Instead, the media focussed on Mousavi’s rally on June 15. This was preceded by rumours that he and his supporters had been arrested; when this turned out to be false, their tune changed: the authorities had refused to give permission for his rally, they alleged. When this, too, turned out to be untrue, then the media changed its tack again: they said Mousavi’s supporters had defied the ban and the authorities were forced to “retreat”.
There was no interference from the authorities to disrupt the rally despite people setting fire to buses, smashing store windows and causing damage to property. At the end of the rally, some people tried to storm the Basij offices in Tehran. It was at this stage that shooting occurred that resulted in seven deaths. By nightfall, calm had returned. Both camps announced rallies for June 16 but only one—that of Ahmedinejad supporters—was held as they arrived at the rally site, Vali Asr square, ahead of the opposition group and seemed to take control. Also, the Guardian Council announced on June 16 that it would hold a recount in those polling stations where the opposition said irregularities had occurred. This was rejected by Mousavi’s supporters who demanded that the June 12 election results be annulled and fresh ones held, a demand unlikely to be met.
Amid all the hype about rigging, some basic facts must be kept in mind. President Ahmedinejad may be unpopular in the West because of his outspoken views but he enjoys widespread support in Iran. His support base includes the rural population, the urban poor as well as the religious. This constitutes the overwhelming majority of Iran’s population. The urban educated middle class is a minority and is generally confined to the northern parts of Tehran. Their children go to university, drive expensive cars and frequent five-star hotels. It is this group that has largely coalesced around Mousavi. It would be unfair, however, to accuse Mousavi of egging the rioters to indulge in violence but there is little doubt that there are agents provocateurs within his group that are bent on creating chaos in Iran.
Ahmedinejad’s supporters are largely poor; most do not speak English, hence their inability to convey their feelings to Western reporters who in any case are not interested in their point of view, but they are solidly behind the revolution and know where their interests lie. It is this class of people that made the greatest sacrifices in defence of the revolution during the brutal Iraqi-imposed war in 1980-1988. This is not mere conjecture. In an article jointly authored by Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty and published in the Washington Post on June 15, 2009, the two writers revealed that Ahmedinejad’s 2 to 1 margin was actually confirmed by their own survey of public opinion conducted in Iran three weeks earlier. “While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad’s principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran’s provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.”
The poll undertaken by two US non-profit organizations—Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, and the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation—from May 11 to May 20 was the third in a series over the past two years. It was conducted by telephone from a neighbouring country (probably Dubai); field work was carried out in Farsi by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award. The polling was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and thus had nothing to do with the government of Iran or with Ahmedinejad.
In recent media coverage, much has been said about Iranian youth with the automatic assumption that they all oppose the Islamic government. This is not true, as the US-led survey found. The misconception has emerged because Western reporters only talk to north Tehran-based, university educated youth. These rich, spoiled youth do not represent the entire country. Nor is the Internet the harbinger of change, as made out by media reports. The poll by Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty found “that only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.”
There was an even more startling revelation made by the poll. Some reports have questioned how Ahmedinejad could win in the home province of Mousavi. Here is what the Ballen and Doherty survey found. “The breadth of Ahmadinejad’s support was apparent in our pre-election survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasized his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favoured Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi.” It is not difficult to see why. Ahmedinejad had gone out of his way to help the poor and dispossessed in Iran. They in turn came out to vote with their feet. The survey also confirmed what we have said already: Mousavi’s “support came primarily from university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians.” These are people that are well-connected and are able to convey their thoughts and ideas to Western reporters, hence the kind of images of Iran created abroad.
There is one final point that needs to be made. Some people have argued that in Iran people make up their mind only in the last two weeks of elections. Again, this is true only for the urbanized elites; the rural population knows who their friend or supporter is. Besides, the vote can swing either way: both toward and against Ahmedinejad and it is inaccurate to assume that all the swing votes would have gone to Mousavi. Ballen and Doherty reported that when their survey was conducted, “almost a third of Iranians were also still undecided. Yet the baseline distributions we found then mirror the results reported by the Iranian authorities, indicating the possibility that the vote is not the product of widespread fraud.”
Finally, one must make a quick comparison with what happened in the June 7 elections in Lebanon. Tens of thousands of people of Lebanese origin were flown from abroad, all expenses paid by the Saudis, to vote for the March 14 group led by Saad Hariri. The Saudis also paid each person $500 for pocket money. Despite this massive fraud, Hariri’s group got 68 seats in parliament (two less than they had in the previous one) while the Hizbullah-backed alliance got 57 seats (one less than in the earlier one). There were three independents. Hizbullah Secretary General did not complain that the election was rigged. He told his supporters to accept the result and move on.
There was little or no mention in the Western media about Lebanese vote rigging; the only thing one heard was that Hizbullah had been “defeated”. "
http://www.legitgov.org/price_us_hypocrisy_iran_210609.html
"'Hello, Pot? This is Kettle. You're Green.' --US Hypocrisy Toward Iran By Lori Price, www.legitgov.org
The world's biggest hypocrite and meddlesome nosy parker, the United States, has outdone itself with its reaction to the post-election events in Iran. At least five glaring 'grand hypocrisy' categories have emerged, with more likely on the way. What other country -- having just endured eight years of dictatorship as the result of two stolen elections -- could actually spew outrage over... another nation's 'stolen election?' Gag me with a green chainsaw.
Grand hypocrisy #1: Obama Presses Iran to Halt 'Violence Against Own People,' Forgetting US 'Violence Against Own People'
Police Unleash Force On Rally in Tehran --Obama, in Boldest Terms Yet, Presses Iran to Halt Violence Against Own People (The Washington Post) 21 Jun 2009 Fiery chaos broke out in downtown Tehran on Saturday as security forces blocked streets and used tear gas, water cannons and batons to break up a demonstration against the reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Security forces were seen firing warning shots into the air, but there were also unconfirmed reports that several people were hit by gunfire. President Obama, in his strongest comments to date on a political standoff that has paralyzed Iran for a week, urged the Iranian government "to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people."
'Violence and unjust actions against its own people.' How undemocratic of the government of Iran!
But, looky here! Use of Force Against RNC Protesters "Disproportionate," Charges Amnesty International (Amnesty International, London) 05 Sep 2008 Amnesty International is concerned by allegations of excessive use of force and mass arrests by police at demonstrations in St. Paul, Minnesota during the Republican National Convention (RNC) from September 1-4, 2008. The human rights organization is calling on the city and county authorities to ensure that all allegations of ill-treatment and other abuses are impartially investigated, with a review of police tactics and weapons in the policing of demonstrations.
And here! Democracy Now! Host and Producers Arrested at Republican Convention (The Washington Post) 01 Sep 2008 Democracy Now! radio host Amy Goodman and two producers were arrested while covering demonstrations at the Republican convention in St. Paul, Minn. Goodman was released after being held for over three hours, but is still waiting to hear when Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar would be released... "They seriously manhandled me and handcuffed my hands behind my back. The top ID [at the convention] is to get on the floor and the Secret Service ripped that off me. I had my Democracy Now! ID too. I was clearly a reporter." Goodman, who was released after being charged with a misdemeanor, said that Salazar had been hurt in the face, while Kouddous had been thrown up against a wall and hurt his elbow. "Nicole told me that as they moved in on three sides, she asked them 'How do I get away from this?' and they jumped on her." Both Kouddous and Salazar could be held for up to 36 hours. "One of the police kept shouting at me 'Shut up, shut up," she said. "It was extremely threatening."
Raytheon ADS – A Pain ray gun to keep us in line (Newlaunches) 26 Jun 2008 Controlling an angry mob is not the task of any sane individual; sometimes it requires raw brute force. So far the use of tear gas and water canons has eased an awkward riot situation. There are some laser weapons, also called dazzlers, which are handheld devices that can temporarily blind criminals, while kinetic technologies include bean-bag rounds, water cannons and even sponge grenades filled with powdered irritant chemicals. According to a report by its Scientific Development Branch a new type of pain ray gun or Active denial system (ADS) has been developed which projects microwave-like radiation for distances of more than 500 yards, creating an excruciating and full-body burning sensation in anyone caught in its beam. The millimeter-wave rays penetrate skin to a depth of about 1/64in but cause no permanent damage, according to Raytheon, the system's US-based maker. Prototypes of the weapon, called Silent Guardian, weighed about three tons and were mounted on trucks. The Scientific Development Branch, based in Sandridge in Hertfordshire, has been looking at a portable version of the ADS being developed by Raytheon for the US National Institute of Justice.
I don't see the Raytheon pain ray gun tweets - where are they? Can you imagine what the Faux News trolls would say if Iran was testing a pain ray gun for use on 'angry mobs?'
Also, where was Barack Obama's condemnation of police violence in Minnesota, the wall-to-wall PentaPost coverage, CNN's insipid 'iReports' and the millions of green tweets regarding the US crackdown on protesters in the US?
"
http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/mossad-cia-western-media-big...
"Not only are they aware of decades of western intervention in their affairs, the fact that thousands of US troops continue to battle forces in two of Iran’s neighbors makes Washington unwanted and detested. Why should they do anything to please it? Yet, in the minds of the US news media, it is Washington’s needs that dominate all discussion.
The above paragraph is key to the understanding of the Iranian election’s aftermath. Despite major attempts to discredit Ahmadinejad by the Mossad, the CIA and the Western Media, he won the election. They lost it!
Now they will have to learn to live with it. "
"The Iranian Election and a Hysterical Media
by Ron Jacobs
Here comes the hysteria and bold-faced lies. In the wake of the Iranian election, various commentators and so-called reporters in the United States are reacting as if the end of the world was at hand. Although nobody knows for certain and everyone only has the words of western press pundits and an angry candidate to go by, virtually every mainstream US news source is calling the re-election of Ahmadinejad the result of fraud. There has been no verification of this from any objective source, nor has there been any proof beyond the speculation of media folks who either want to create a story or are so convinced of what they believe to be the incumbent’s essentially evil nature that they can not comprehend his re-election. A good example of this is a story by Bill Keller in the New York Times. In that piece, Ahmadinejad was once again incorrectly called a Holocaust-denier and his support was put down as being comprised mostly of women hating peasants and civil servants who somehow benefited from his patronage. The liberal reformer Moussavi’s supporters were portrayed in a considerably more favorable light.
Completely missing from Keller’s piece and many other pieces in the US mainstream media (and liberal magazines like the Nation) is any genuine attempt to analyze both the class nature of the different candidate’s supporters and the role Washington plays in the media’s perception of Iranian politics. Keller’s most honest analytical statement in his entire piece: “Saturday was a day of smoldering anger, crushed hopes and punctured illusions, from the streets of Tehran to the policy centers of Western capitals.” Keller and his fellow journalists accept that the desires of Western capitals, especially Washington, should be important to Iranians. While this may certainly be the case among a small number of the intelligentsia and business community in Iran, the fact is that the West, especially Washington, is still not very popular among the Iranian masses. Not only are they aware of decades of western intervention in their affairs, the fact that thousands of US troops continue to battle forces in two of Iran’s neighbors makes Washington unwanted and detested. Why should they do anything to please it? Yet, in the minds of the US news media, it is Washington’s needs that dominate all discussion.
As for the class analysis. Rightly or wrongly, Ahmadinejad seems to appeal to the majority of peasants and workers in Iran. Just like Marat and the Jacobins appealed to the peasants and urban poor during the French revolution while Brissot and the Girondins appealed to the merchants and educated classes, Ahmadinejad’s support comes from those who need bread while Moussavi’s comes from those with plenty of bread and now want more civil liberties. While it is arguably true that Ahmadinejad’s policies have caused as many economic policies as they have solved, the fact remains that his supporters believe in his 2005 campaign call to bring the oil profits to the dinner table. Mr. Moussavi’s statements regarding the eventual reduction of commodity subsidies that benefit the poor may have hurt him in that demographic more than his supporters acknowledge. In a Washington Post article published the day before the election, it was noted (along with the fact that Ahmadinejad won the 2005 election with a “surprising” 62% of the vote) that his economic policies included the distribution of “loans, money and other help for local needs.” One of these programs involved providing insurance to women who make rugs in their homes and had been without insurance until Ahmadinejad came to power. Critics, including Moussavi, argue that his “free-spending policies have fueled inflation and squandered windfall petrodollars without reducing unemployment.” There are other elements at play here, including the fabled corruption of certain unelected leaders in Iran and the role the international economic crisis plays in each and every nation’s economy–a factor from which Iran is not immune. In addition, the particular nature of an Islamic economy that blends government and private business creates a constant conflict between those who would nationalize everything and those who would privatize it all.
In regards to what this means for relations between Washington and Tehran–they will continue down whatever path Mr. Obama wishes them to go. Tel Aviv, which criticized the election results, would not have changed its desire to quash Tehran no matter who won. Indeed, the fact that Ahmadinejad was re-elected makes it easier for Tel Aviv to continue demonizing the only genuine threat to its dominance of the region. The bottom line, however, is that the president of Iran really has no power in the course Iranian foreign policy takes. That power remains with the Council of Guardians and the legislature. Mr. Obama would do well to continue his attempts to negotiate without conditions. He would also be wise to end any covert activity against the Iranian government currently being conducted. The western media would do well to inform themselves on the real nature of Iranian politics and society instead of taking the viewpoint that what’s best for Washington is best for Tehran. Then again, that media should consider the non-Washington viewpoint in all of its international coverage.
For the left, the answer is clear. The situation in Iran has changed. The apparent popularity of Moussavi and other officially reocgnized reformers showed this before the election. The dispute over the truth of the election results proves this even further. However, neither Ahmadinejad or Moussavi represent a genuine move away from the power of the bazaar class and its appointed clerical council. The desire for more civil freedoms must be coordinated with the need for economic justice. Both of these aspirations seem to be currently at odds. It seems apparent that only a leftist movement is capable of bringing the two together in a nation divided between its cities and its countryside;its middle class and its workers and rural dwellers. This was the case prior to the takeover of the Iranian revolution by socially conservative religious forces in 1980 and it could be the case again."
What Actually Happened in the Iranian Presidential Election? http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14052
A Hard Look at the Numbers
Since the June 12 Iranian presidential elections, Iran "experts” have mushroomed like bacteria in a Petri dish. So here is a quiz for all those instant experts. Which major country has elected more presidents than any in the world since 1980? Further, which nation is the only one that held ten presidential elections within thirty years of its revolution?
The answer to both questions, of course, is Iran. Since 1980, it has elected six presidents, while the U.S. is a close second with five, and France at three. In addition, the U.S. held four presidential elections within three decades of its revolution to Iran’s ten.
The Iranian elections have unified the left and the right in the West and unleashed harsh criticisms and attacks from the “outraged” politicians to the “indignant” mainstream media. Even the blogosphere has joined this battle with near uniformity, on the side of Iran’s opposition, which is quite rare in cyberspace.
Much of the allegations of election fraud have been just that: unsubstantiated accusations. No one has yet been able to provide a solid shred of evidence of wide scale fraud that would have garnered eleven million votes for one candidate over his opponent.
So let’s analyze much of the evidence that is available to date.
More than thirty pre-election polls were conducted in Iran since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his main opponent, former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, announced their candidacies in early March 2009. The polls varied widely between the two opponents, but if one were to average their results, Ahmadinejad would still come out on top. However, some of the organizations sponsoring these polls, such as Iranian Labor News Agency and Tabnak, admit openly that they have been allies of Mousavi, the opposition, or the so-called reform movement. Their numbers were clearly tilted towards Mousavi and gave him an unrealistic advantage of over 30 per cent in some polls. If such biased polls were excluded, Ahmadinejad’s average over Mousavi would widen to about 21 points.
On the other hand, there was only one poll carried out by a western news organization. It was jointly commissioned by the BBC and ABC News, and conducted by an independent entity called the Center for Public Opinion (CPO) of the New America Foundation. The CPO has a reputation of conducting accurate opinion polls, not only in Iran, but across the Muslim world since 2005. The poll, conducted a few weeks before the elections, predicted an 89 percent turnout rate. Further, it showed that Ahmadinejad had a nationwide advantage of two to one over Mousavi.
How did this survey compare to the actual results? And what are the possibilities of wide scale election fraud?
According to official results, there were 46.2 million registered voters in Iran. The turnout was massive, as predicted by the CPO. Almost 39.2 million Iranians participated in the elections for a turn out rate of 85 percent, in which about 38.8 million ballots were deemed valid (about 400,000 ballots were left blank). Officially, President Ahmadinejad received 24.5 million votes to Mousavi’s 13.2 million votes, or 62.6 per cent to 33.8 per cent of the total votes, respectively. In fact, this result mirrored the 2005 elections when Ahmadinejad received 61.7 per cent to former President Hashemi Rafsanjani’s 35.9 per cent in the runoff elections. Two other minor candidates, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaee, received the rest of the votes in this election.
Shortly after the official results were announced Mousavi’s supporters and Western political pundits cried foul and accused the government of election fraud. The accusations centered around four themes. First, although voting had been extended several hours due to the heavy turnout, it was alleged that the elections were called too quickly from the time the polls were closed, with more than 39 million ballots to count.
Second, these critics insinuated that election monitors were biased or that, in some instances, the opposition did not have its own monitors present during the count. Third, they pointed out that it was absurd to think that Mousavi, who descended from the Azerbaijan region in northwest Iran, was defeated handily in his own hometown. Fourth, the Mousavi camp charged that in some polling stations, ballots ran out and people were turned away without voting.
The next day, Mosuavi and the two other defeated candidates lodged 646 complaints to the Guardian Council, the entity charged with overseeing the integrity of the elections. The Council promised to conduct full investigations of all the complaints. By the following morning, a copy of a letter by a low-level employee in the Interior Ministry sent to Supreme Guide Ali Khamanei, was widely circulating around the world. (Western politicians and media outlets like to call him “Supreme Leader” but no such title exists in Iran.)
The letter stated that Mousavi had won the elections, and that Ahmadinejad had actually come in third. It also promised that the elections were being fixed in favor of Ahmadinejad per Khamanei’s orders. It is safe to assume that the letter was a forgery since an unidentified low-level employee would not be the one addressing Ayatollah Khamanaei. Robert Fisk of The Independent reached the same conclusion by casting grave doubts that Ahmadinejad would score third – garnering less than 6 million votes in such an important election- as alleged in the forged letter.
There were a total of 45,713 ballot boxes that were set up in cities, towns and villages across Iran. With 39.2 million ballots cast, there were less than 860 ballots per box. Unlike other countries where voters can cast their ballots on several candidates and issues in a single election, Iranian voters had only one choice to consider: their presidential candidate. Why would it take more than an hour or two to count 860 ballots per poll? After the count, the results were then reported electronically to the Ministry of the Interior in Tehran.
Since 1980, Iran has suffered an eight-year deadly war with Iraq, a punishing boycott and embargo, and a campaign of assassination of dozens of its lawmakers, an elected president and a prime minister from the group Mujahideen Khalq Organization. (MKO is a deadly domestic violent organization, with headquarters in France, which seeks to topple the government by force.) Despite all these challenges, the Islamic Republic of Iran has never missed an election during its three decades. It has conducted over thirty elections nationwide. Indeed, a tradition of election orderliness has been established, much like election precincts in the U.S. or boroughs in the U.K. The elections in Iran are organized, monitored and counted by teachers and professionals including civil servants and retirees (again much like the U.S.)
There has not been a tradition of election fraud in Iran. Say what you will about the system of the Islamic Republic, but its elected legislators have impeached ministers and “borked” nominees of several Presidents, including Ahmadinejad. Rubberstamps, they are not. In fact, former President Mohammad Khatami, considered one of the leading reformists in Iran, was elected president by the people, when the interior ministry was run by archconservatives. He won with over 70 percent of the vote, not once, but twice.
When it comes to elections, the real problem in Iran is not fraud but candidates’ access to the ballots (a problem not unique to the country, just ask Ralph Nader or any other third party candidate in the U.S.) It is highly unlikely that there was a huge conspiracy involving tens of thousands of teachers, professionals and civil servants that somehow remained totally hidden and unexposed.
Moreover, while Ahmadinejad belongs to an active political party that has already won several elections since 2003, Mousavi is an independent candidate who emerged on the political scene just three months ago, after a 20-year hiatus. It was clear during the campaign that Ahmadinejad had a nationwide campaign operation. He made over sixty campaign trips throughout Iran in less than twelve weeks, while his opponent campaigned only in the major cities, and lacked a sophisticated campaign apparatus.
It is true that Mousavi has an Azeri background. But the CPO poll mentioned above, and published before the elections, noted that “its survey indicated that only 16 per cent of Azeri Iranians will vote for Mr. Mousavi. By contrast, 31 per cent of the Azeris claim they will vote for Mr. Ahmadinejad.” In the end, according to official results, the election in that region was much closer than the overall result. In fact, Mousavi won narrowly in the West Azerbaijan province but lost the region to Ahmadinejad by a 45 to 52 per cent margin (or 1.5 to 1.8 million votes).
However, the double standard applied by Western news agencies is striking. Richard Nixon trounced George McGovern in his native state of South Dakota in the 1972 elections. Had Al Gore won his home state of Tennessee in 2000, no one would have cared about a Florida recount, nor would there have been a Supreme Court case called Bush v. Gore. If Vice-Presidential candidate John Edwards had won the states he was born and raised in (South and North Carolina), President John Kerry would now be serving his second term. But somehow, in Western newsrooms Middle Eastern people choose their candidates not on merit, but on the basis of their “tribe.”
The fact that minor candidates such as Karroubi would garner fewer votes than expected, even in their home regions as critics charge, is not out of the ordinary. Many voters reach the conclusion that they do not want to waste their votes when the contest is perceived to be between two major candidates. Karroubi indeed received far fewer votes this time around than he did in 2005, including in his hometown. Likewise, Ross Perot lost his home state of Texas to Bob Dole of Kansas in 1996, while in 2004, Ralph Nader received one eighth of the votes he had four years earlier.
Some observers note that when the official results were being announced, the margin between the candidates held steady throughout the count. In fact, this is no mystery. Experts say that generally when 3-5 per cent of the votes from a given region are actually counted, there is a 95 per cent confidence level that such result will hold firm. As for the charge that ballots ran out and some people were turned away, it is worth mentioning that voting hours were extended four times in order to allow as many people as possible the opportunity to vote. But even if all the people who did not vote, had actually voted for Mousavi (a virtual impossibility), that would be 6.93 million additional votes, much less than the 11 million vote difference between the top two candidates.
Ahmadinejad is certainly not a sympathetic figure. He is an ideologue, provocative, and sometimes behaving imprudently. But to characterize the struggle in Iran as a battle between democratic forces and a “dictator,” is to exhibit total ignorance of Iran’s internal dynamics, or to deliberately distort them. There is no doubt that there is a significant segment of Iranian society, concentrated around major metropolitan areas, and comprising many young people, that passionately yearns for social freedoms. They are understandably angry because their candidate came up short. But it would be a huge mistake to read this domestic disagreement as an “uprising” against the Islamic Republic, or as a call to embark on a foreign policy that would accommodate the West at the expense of Iran’s nuclear program or its vital interests.
Nations display respect to other nations only when they respect their sovereignty. If any nation, for instance, were to dictate the United States’ economic, foreign or social policies, Americans would be indignant. When France, under President Chirac opposed the American adventure in Iraq in 2003, some U.S. Congressmen renamed a favorite fast food from French Fries to “Freedom Fries.” They made it known that the French were unwelcome in the U.S.
The U.S. has a legacy of interference in Iran’s internal affairs, notably when it toppled the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953. This act, of which most Americans are unaware, is ingrained in every Iranian from childhood. It is the main cause of much of their perpetual anger at the U.S. It took 56 years for an American president to acknowledge this illegal act, when Obama did so earlier this month in Cairo.
Therefore, it would be a colossal mistake to interfere in Iran’s internal affairs yet again. President Obama is wise to leave this matter to be resolved by the Iranians themselves. Political expediency by the Republicans or pro-Israel Democrats will be extremely dangerous and will yield serious repercussions. Such reckless conduct by many in the political class and the media appears to be a blatant attempt to demonize Iran and its current leadership, in order to justify any future military attack by Israel if Iran does not give up its nuclear ambition.
President Obama’s declarations in Cairo are now being aptly recalled. Regarding Iran, he said, “I recognize it will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude, and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect.”
But the first sign of respect is to let the Iranians sort out their differences without any overt –or covert –interference.
Esam Al-Amin can be reached at alamin1919@gmail.com
© Copyright Esam Al-Amin, CounterPunch, 2009
Have you had enough of the propaganda war (On Iran) that is going on?
Nuff said.
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
>>"their hatred of Ahmedinejad, the plucky Iranian President who drew rings around them with his masterful interviews, did not allow them to see that he may have support among the Iranian masses. President Ahmedinejad has maintained a level of modesty and simplicity that has earned him respect not only among Iranians but also Muslims worldwide."
Poor guy. He's such a sweetie. Why do those evil reporters give him such a hard time?
>>"his popularity was not merely based on sentiment; he had promised during his first presidential campaign in 2005 that he would put Iran’s oil wealth on the tables of the poor."
Here is the basis of this article's very clear bias. Never mind that Achmadinejad is a dictatorial tyrant-- he's a collectivist, so he can do no wrong.
>>" (at the RNC in America, a protester who was arrested has this to say) "One of the police kept shouting at me 'Shut up, shut up," she said. "It was extremely threatening.""
Maybe she wouldn't mind changing places with that woman in Iran who was shot in the street, since the US government is just as tyrannical as Iran's. It's all the same right?
"Maybe she wouldn't mind changing places with that woman in Iran who was shot in the street, since the US government is just as tyrannical as Iran's. It's all the same right?"
Lets ask Rachel Corrie. Maybe there is a statement coming from Obama about that, or maybe one talking about the 1400+ Palestinians killed not to long ago when his roaring silence was hard to shout down.
Lets just agree that it is all the same, use any and everything to get to the goal set out. And what was the goal again? Regime change in Iran.
Your propaganda edge is showing Claire. Are you breaking the Matrix, or Trying to keep it from cracking?
And why those reporters give him such a bad time? Lets put some light on that, what does he actually say:
Read and see why, maybe some people don't like it when someone calls an ace an ace.
"Over the last centuries, humanity has gone through great sufferings and pains. In the Medieval Ages, thinkers and scientists were sentenced to death. It was then followed by a period of slavery and slave trade. Innocent people were taken captive in their millions and separated from their families and loved ones to be taken to Europe and America under the worst conditions. A dark period that also experienced occupation, lootings and massacres of innocent people.
Many years passed by before nations rose up and fought for their liberty and freedom and they paid a high price for it. They lost millions of lives to expel the occupiers and establish independent and national governments. However, it did not take long before power grabbers imposed two wars in Europe which also plagued a part of Asia and Africa. Those horrific wars claimed about a hundred million lives and left behind massive devastation. Had lessons been learnt from the occupations, horrors and crimes of those wars, there would have been a ray of hope for the future.
The victorious powers called themselves the conquerors of the world while ignoring or down treading upon rights of other nations by the imposition of oppressive laws and international arrangements.
Ladies and gentlemen, let us take a look at the UN Security Council which is one of the legacies of World War I and World War II. What was the logic behind their granting themselves the veto right? How can such logic comply with humanitarian or spiritual values? Would it not be inconformity with the recognized principles of justice, equality before the law, love and human dignity? Would it not be discrimination, injustice, violations of human rights or humiliation of the majority of nations and countries?
The council is the highest decision-making world body for safeguarding international peace and security. How can we expect the realization of justice and peace when discrimination is legalized and the origin of the law is dominated by coercion and force rather than by justice and the rights?
Coercion and arrogance is the origin of oppression and wars. Although today many proponents of racism condemn racial discrimination in their words and their slogans, a number of powerful countries have been authorized to decide for other nations based on their own interests and at their own discretion and they can easily violate all laws and humanitarian values as they have done so.
Following World War II, they resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering and they sent migrants from Europe, the United States and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in occupied Palestine. And, in fact, in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe, they helped bring to power the most cruel and repressive racist regime in Palestine.
The Security Council helped stabilize the occupying regime and supported it in the past 60 years giving them a free hand to commit all sorts of atrocities. It is all the more regrettable that a number of Western governments and the United States have committed themselves to defending those racist perpetrators of genocide while the awakened-conscience and free-minded people of the world condemn aggression, brutalities and the bombardment of civilians in Gaza. The supporters of Israel have always been either supportive or silent against the crimes.
Dear friends, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen. What are the root causes of the US attacks against Iraq or the invasion of Afghanistan?
Was the motive behind the invasion of Iraq anything other than the arrogance of the then US administration and the mounting pressures on the part of the possessors of wealth and power to expand their sphere of influence seeking the interests of giant arms manufacturing companies affecting a noble culture with thousands of years of historical background, eliminating the potential and practical threats of Muslim countries against the Zionist regime or to control and plunder the energy resources of the Iraqi people?
Why, indeed, almost a million people were killed and injured and a few more millions were displaced? Why, indeed, the Iraqi people have suffered enormous losses amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars? And why was billions of dollars imposed on the American people as the result of these military actions? Was not the military action against Iraq planned by the Zionists and their allies in the then US administration in complicity with the arms manufacturing countries and the possessors of wealth? Did the invasion of Afghanistan restore peace, security and economic wellbeing in the country?
The United States and its allies not only have failed to contain the production of drugs in Afghanistan, but the cultivation of narcotics has multiplied in the course of their presence. The basic question is that what was the responsibility and the job of the then US administration and its allies?
Did they represent the countries of the world? Have they been mandated by them? Have they been authorized by the people of the world to interfere in all parts of the globe, of course mostly in our region? Are not these measures a clear example of egocentrism, racism, discrimination or infringement upon the dignity and independence of nations?
Ladies and gentlemen, who is responsible for the current global economic crisis? Where did the crisis start from? From Africa, Asia or from the United States in the first place then spreading across Europe and their allies?
For a long time, they imposed inequitable economic regulations by their political power on the international economy. They imposed a financial and monetary system without a proper international oversight mechanism on nations and governments that played no role in repressive trends or policies. They have not even allowed their people to oversea or monitor their financial policies. They introduced all laws and regulations in defiance of all moral values only to protect the interests of the possessors of wealth and power.
They further presented a definition for market economy and competition that denied many of the economic opportunities that could be available to other countries of the world. They even transferred their problems to others while the waves of crisis lashed back plaguing their economies with thousands of billions of dollars in budget deficit. And today, they are injecting hundreds of billions of dollars of cash from the pockets of their own people and other nations into the failing banks, companies and financial institutions making the situation more and more complicated for their economy and their people. They are simply thinking about maintaining power and wealth. They could not care any less about the people of the world and even their own people.
Mr. President, Ladies and gentlemen, Racism is rooted in the lack of knowledge concerning the root of human existence as the selected creature of God. It is also the product of his deviation from the true path of human life and the obligations of mankind in the world of creation, failing to consciously worship God, not being able to think about the philosophy of life or the path to perfection that are the main ingredients of divine and humanitarian values which have restricted the horizon of human outlook making transient and limited interests, the yardstick for his action. That is why evil’s power took shape and expanded its realm of power while depriving others from enjoying equitable and just opportunities of development.
The result has been the making of an unbridled racism that is posing the most serious threats against international peace and has hindered the way for building peaceful coexistence in the entire world. Undoubtedly, racism is the symbol of ignorance which has deep roots in history and it is, indeed, the sign of frustration in the development of human society.
It is, therefore, crucially important to trace the manifestations of racism in situations or in societies where ignorance or lack of knowledge prevails. This increasing general awareness and understanding towards the philosophy of human existence is the principle struggle against such manifestations, and reveals the truth that human kind centers on the creation of the universe and the key to solving the problem of racism is a return to spiritual and moral values and finally the inclination to worship God Almighty.
The international community must initiate collective moves to raise awareness in afflicted societies where ignorance of racism still prevails so as to bring to a halt the spread of these malicious manifestations.
Dear Friends, today, the human community is facing a kind of racism which has tarnished the image of humanity in the beginning of the third millennium.
World Zionism personifies racism that falsely resorts to religions and abuses religious sentiments to hide its hatred and ugly face. However, it is of great importance to bring into focus the political goals of some of the world powers and those who control huge economic resources and interests in the world. They mobilize all the resources including their economic and political influence and world media to render support in vain to the Zionist regime and to maliciously diminish the indignity and disgrace of this regime.
This is not simply a question of ignorance and one cannot conclude these ugly phenomena through consular campaigns. Efforts must be made to put an end to the abuse by Zionists and their political and international supporters and in respect with the will and aspirations of nations. Governments must be encouraged and supported in their fights aimed at eradicating this barbaric racism and to move towards reform in current international mechanisms.
There is no doubt that you are all aware of the conspiracies of some powers and Zionist circles against the goals and objectives of this conference. Unfortunately, there have been literatures and statements in support of Zionists and their crimes. And it is the responsibility of honorable representatives of nations to disclose these campaigns which run counter to humanitarian values and principles.
It should be recognized that boycotting such a session as an outstanding international capacity is a true indication of supporting the blatant example of racism. In defending human rights, it is primarily important to defend the rights of all nations to participate equally in all important international decision making processes without the influence of certain world powers.
And secondly, it is necessary to restructure the existing international organizations and their respective arrangements. Therefore this conference is a testing ground and the world public opinion today and tomorrow will judge our decisions and our actions.
Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, the world is going through rapid fundamental changes. Power relations have become weak and fragile. The sound of cracks in the pillars of world systems can now be heard. Major political and economic structures are on the brink of collapse. Political and security crises are on the rise. The worsening crisis in the world economy for which there can be seen no bright prospect, demonstrates the rising tide of far-reaching global changes. I have repeatedly emphasized the need to change the wrong direction through which the world is being managed today and I have also warned of the dire consequences of any delay in this crucial responsibility.
Now in this valuable event, I would like to announce to all leaders, thinkers and to all nations of the world present in this meeting and those who have a hunger for peace and economic well-being that the unjust economic management of the world is now at the end of the road. This deadlock was inevitable since the logic of this imposed management was oppressive.
The logic of collective management of world affairs is based on noble aspirations which centers on human beings and the supremacy of the almighty God. Therefore it defies any policy or plan which goes against the influence of nations. The victory of right over wrong and the establishment of a just world system has been promised by the Almighty God and his messengers and it has been a shared goal of all human beings from different societies and generations in the course of history. Realization of such a future depends on the knowledge of creation and the belief of the faithful.
The making of a global society is in fact the accomplishment of a noble goal held in the establishment of a common global system that will be run with the participation of all nations of the world in all major decision making processes and the definite root to this sublime goal.
Scientific and technical capacities as well as communication technology have created a common and widespread understanding of the world society and has provided the necessary ground for a common system. Now it is upon all intellectuals, thinkers and policy makers in the world to carry out their historical responsibility with a firm belief in this definite root.
I also want to lay emphasis on the fact that Western liberalism and capitalism has reached its end since it has failed to perceive the truth of the world and humans as they are.
It has imposed its own goals and directions on human beings. There is no regard for human and divine values, justice, freedom, love and brotherhood and it has based living on intense competition, securing individual and cooperative material interest.
Now we must learn from the past by initiating collective efforts in dealing with present challenges and in this connection, and as a closing remark, I wish to draw your kind attention to two important issues:
Firstly, it is absolutely possible to improve the existing situation in the world. However it must be noted that this could be only achieved through the cooperation of all countries in order to get the best out of the existing capacities and resources in the world. My participation in this conference is because of my conviction to these important issues as well as to our common responsibility of defending the rights of nations vis-à-vis the sinister phenomena of racism and being with you, the thinkers of the world.
Secondly, mindful of the inefficiency of the current international political, economic and security systems, it is necessary to focus on divine and humanitarian values by referring to the true definition of human beings based upon justice and respect for the rights of all people in all parts of the world and by acknowledging the past wrong doings in the past dominant management of the world, and to undertake collective measures to reform the existing structures.
In this respect, it is crucially important to rapidly reform the structure of the Security Council, including the elimination of the discriminatory veto right and to change the current world financial and monetary systems.
It is evident that lack of understanding of the urgency for change is equivalent to the much heavier costs of delay.
Dear Friends, beware that to move in the direction of justice and human dignity is like a rapid flow in the current of a river. Let us not forget the essence of love and affection. The promised future of human beings is a great asset that may serve our purposes in keeping together to build a new world.
In order to make the world a better place full of love and blessings, a world devoid of poverty and hatred, merging the increasing blessings of God Almighty and the righteous managing of the perfect human being, let us all join hands in friendship in the fulfillment of such a new world."
Now if the Western Media wasn't so tightly under control, you would have been able to hear this yourself. But no they only focused on the "Spontanious" walk-out by all CONTROLLED nations representatives, to make sure you never ever would be able to hear the man speak, and decide for yourself if he is that bad, or not.
http://enduringamerica.com/2009/04/22/video-extract-from-ahmadinejad-spe...
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
Talk about propaganda-- did you read this semi-incoherent tract before you posted it?
>>"The logic of collective management of world affairs is based on noble aspirations which centers on human beings and the supremacy of the almighty God. Therefore it defies any policy or plan which goes against the influence of nations. The victory of right over wrong and the establishment of a just world system has been promised by the Almighty God and his messengers and it has been a shared goal of all human beings from different societies and generations in the course of history. Realization of such a future depends on the knowledge of creation and the belief of the faithful.
The making of a global society is in fact the accomplishment of a noble goal held in the establishment of a common global system that will be run with the participation of all nations of the world in all major decision making processes and the definite root to this sublime goal."
This writer is advocating a collectivist New World Order (or a NEW New World Order, if you believe the Zionist conspiracy theory):
>>"The making of a global society is in fact the accomplishment of a noble goal held in the establishment of a common global system that will be run with the participation of all nations of the world in all major decision making processes and the definite root to this sublime goal.
Scientific and technical capacities as well as communication technology have created a common and widespread understanding of the world society and has provided the necessary ground for a common system. Now it is upon all intellectuals, thinkers and policy makers in the world to carry out their historical responsibility with a firm belief in this definite root.
I also want to lay emphasis on the fact that Western liberalism and capitalism has reached its end since it has failed to perceive the truth of the world and humans as they are."
>>"There is no doubt that you are all aware of the conspiracies of some powers and Zionist circles against the goals and objectives of this conference. Unfortunately, there have been literatures and statements in support of Zionists and their crimes. And it is the responsibility of honorable representatives of nations to disclose these campaigns which run counter to humanitarian values and principles."
Aha. The writer is a representative of one of the Islamic nations that was pushing the anti- free speech UN directives against the "defamation of Islam", which NO ONE should support because they would make it illegal to criticize that religion, which would be a blatant violation of our fundamental right to freedom. This writer is ANTI-FREEDOM!
>>"The logic of collective management of world affairs is based on noble aspirations which centers on human beings and the supremacy of the almighty God. Therefore it defies any policy or plan which goes against the influence of nations. The victory of right over wrong and the establishment of a just world system has been promised by the Almighty God and his messengers and it has been a shared goal of all human beings from different societies and generations in the course of history. Realization of such a future depends on the knowledge of creation and the belief of the faithful."
Yes, this man's (pretty sure it's a man) goal is something Islamists refer to as the Worldwide Ummah-- the whole world as an Islamic theocratic system. What are you doing posting this garbage on BTM?
"did you read this semi-incoherent tract before you posted it?"
Yes I did, It read real fair. Unless you view it from ONE viewpoint.
" This writer is ANTI-FREEDOM!"
One could say that, especially if the freedom he is against is DICTATED! A Freedom one would only embrace as manna from heaven if one is the DICTATOR or part of the dictating elite.
"What are you doing posting this garbage on BTM?"
Oh you should read my blog entry "Techniques to Discredit " Especially point 2 of the Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
"2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit."
I guess, your agenda again showed Clair. Since you DIDN'T reply to the parts a normal human being, with NO Agenda, and NO Fear would react positive to . See Justice is international and timeless.
And Criminals are Criminals Claire, or do you think there are a special kind of Criminals that should be above ANY human law?.
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
>>"And Criminals are Criminals Claire, or do you think there are a special kind of Criminals that should be above ANY human law?"
No, but your friends from the Islamic Council believe that Sharia law-- the law of the Koran and the Hadiths that proponents of the worldwide Ummah want to impose on all of us-- supersedes a lot of legitimate and good human laws. In fact many of the laws we take for granted in America that protect our life, liberty and property are routinely violated in the name of Sharia. You have to be brainwashed or out of your mind to side with these people. Wake up!
Lets investigate a little further then.
"No, but your friends from the Islamic Council believe"
My Friends? Sweetie, I have no friends among any religion that manipulates fear of believers and unbelievers.
But having said that.. Anyone can tell the truth.. And his or her enemies will by DEFINITION always ATTACK it.
That is how you showed your Bias Claire.
"that Sharia law-- the law of the Koran and the Hadiths that proponents of the worldwide Ummah want to impose on all of us-- "
Yeah right. I already know what Laws under Catholic dictatorship look like, Judaism has its on treats for unbelievers.. (Goyim, Free translates to Animals or beasts, correct?) if they get to rule, Christianity, well witches and Muslims can tell about them honnoring others beliefs and rights.
"a lot of legitimate and good human laws. In fact many of the laws we take for granted in America that protect our life, liberty and property are routinely violated in the name of Sharia."
"The Laws we take for Granted?
Are you Nuts? We may take our freedoms for Granted, LAWS are DICTATED and most times OVERRULING FREEDOMS.
"You have to be brainwashed or out of your mind to side with these people. Wake up!"
Actually I would have to be severely BRAINDEAD, INDOCTRINATED, Stupid, IGNORANT or just asleep, If I didn't recognize TRUTHS when they are spoken....
AND THE ONLY PEOPLE NOT LIKING TRUTHS ARE LIERS, Thiefs, Thugs and manipulators.
Or Blackmailed Politicians or Bought Politicians.
Or Zionists and all they have under control. (And that obviously displayed during the speech, seems to be Half to 3/4 of the Western world.)
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
>>"Yeah right. I already know what Laws under Catholic dictatorship look like, Judaism has its on treats for unbelievers.."
When was the last time Catholics or Jews tried and convicted a woman for adultery and then stoned her to death? Or sentenced someone to death for leaving their religion? I'm talking about illegitimate, perverted laws, here. Yes, we have bad laws (tax laws, employment laws, all kinds of regulations on businesses), and I am fighting to have those thrown out, but in majority Christian, atheist, or Jewish states there are no crazy, murderous, criminal laws against freedom of expression and religion like the ones Islamists want to impose on the world.
>>"LAWS are DICTATED and most times OVERRULING FREEDOMS."
Our most basic laws in America (not the illegitimate regulations imposed since the beginning of the last century by the likes of FDR, or the racial segregation laws that have since been overturned) actually PROTECT our right to life, liberty and property, by punishing those who violate those rights. I'm talking about laws against murder, theft and fraud, and breach of contract. No one should be free to murder another person, or to steal his property from him and get away with it.
"but in majority Christian, atheist, or Jewish states there are no crazy, murderous, criminal laws against freedom of expression and religion like the ones"
+
"laws against murder, theft and fraud, and breach of contract. No one should be free to murder another person, or to steal his property from him and get away with it."
+
Gaza
+
Westbank
+ treating Palestinians like Animals with the rights of Animals ie NONE.
= Conclusion : Pure BS Babe. I am not even going to find you links, that you won't read anyway.
Well ok, one small remark..
Some pirates capture a captain of an American Ship, and Navy seals are send out to free him from these hostage taking pirates. Cynthia McKinney (x times ex congress woman.) is taken ?hostage? in international waters by Israeli forces enforcing an starvation policy on the Ghetto of Palestine like the Germans did with Warsaw, and everything is quiet on the western front. I guess that by itself doesn't strike you as a little weird. Especially in your perverted orwellianized view how did you state it again: "laws against freedom of expression and religion" + "laws against murder, theft and fraud, and breach of contract. No one should be free to murder another person, or to steal his property from him and get away with it." btw, lifetime IS personal property as a matter of fact the only one that really counts.
---
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
>>"Cynthia McKinney (x times ex congress woman.) is taken ?hostage? in international waters by Israeli forces"
Don't be ridiculous. McKinney is not a hostage. She was stopped by Israeli forces when her boat refused to stay away from an Israeli blockade of Gaza. She will be deported, and will soon be safe at home. You think this is ANYTHING LIKE stoning adulterers and executing apostates? Come up with a better example, will ya?
Israel gave Gaza to the Palestinians in good faith, and they violated that faith. All the Palestinians have to do to end the blockade is to stop attacking Israel and start governing themselves like civilized people. It's all up to them, TranceAm, because their "adversary", unlike many of its Islamist neighbors, is not governed by crazy Sharia nonsense, but by a system that by and large acknowledges fundamental human rights. If Palestinians adopted such a system instead of supporting Hamas, they could not only coexist peacefully with Israel, but they could also prosper economically like they never have before. Of course, then they would have new enemies: the theocratic regimes in Egypt, Iran and Syria, among others, that loved them when they were losers, but would hate them were they ever to become shining examples of the benefits of liberty over theocracy.
Can't you see that the Islamists hate liberty because it competes with their theocratic goal? That is why they want to stamp it out everywhere they see it. They can't stand to have a liberal democracy in their neighborhood, because it is a profound threat to them on an ideological level. That is why they hate Israel. That is also why they hate the U.S. I guarantee you they would hate Gaza just as much if the Palestinians turned it into a liberal secular democracy.
"Don't be ridiculous. McKinney is not a hostage. She was stopped by Israeli forces when her boat refused to stay away from an Israeli blockade of Gaza. She will be deported, and will soon be safe at home. You think this is ANYTHING LIKE stoning adulterers and executing apostates? Come up with a better example, will ya?"
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/660.html
This was an act of Piracy in INTERNATIONAL waters.
Something Navy Seals are send out for to KILL the bastards who do this (At least last time in Somalia.).
Unless of course they are the masters of the world and above ANY law.
Israel has NO rights in that OCCUPIED territory.. The fact that you can have the arms and army to occupy a terirtory and starve everyone to death in it, to end up with the property, doesn't make it yours.
Not even if you claim GOD has given it to you and you only had to get rid of the squatting vermin that vacate there.
"Israel gave Gaza to the Palestinians in good faith, and they violated that faith."
The 2 state solution was part of the founding of Israel. Israel had NOTHING given to others.
As a matter of fact, they have a seat in the UN pending on that.
"by and large acknowledges fundamental human rights."
Yep and shows the love by killing children. It is such a bright light.
Here is some more of the love:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/feelthehate.mp4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMA3baJa6tg
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
Israel is defending itself against attacks. If the attacks cease, so will the defensive actions by Israel. All the inhabitants of Gaza have to do is stop launching attacks against Israel and start governing themselves like civilized people. If that happens, the embargo will be lifted and Israel will stop retaliating. Unlike the besieged Israelis, Palestinians can count on their adversaries living up to their promises of a ceasefire. They can count on the fact that Israelis and their government would like nothing better than for all this violence to stop, so they don't have to risk killing innocent people when they retaliate against Palestinian attacks.
Most Israelis would very much like a peaceful two state solution. The problem as exemplified by Gaza is that as soon as land is given to the Palestinians the use it as a base from which to launch attacks.
It seems clear to me that you basically don't want Israel to defend itself. Perhaps you share Ahmadinejad's wish that Israel be wiped off the face of the earth. Why is that, given that Israel is the only liberal democracy in the region? I thought you valued freedom. Why would you want there to be one less free country in the world, and zero free countries in the Middle East? Is it perhaps the worldwide Ummah you desire?
Claire, tell me,
How is it possible that everytime someone opens their eyes from the long long sleep they were in,
they always find themselves opposed by Israeli Apologists for Israeli Atrocities, that demand thru wich colored glasses the atrocities should be viewed to assume some kind of justice?
Poor Israel has to defend itself. With Tanks against children that throw dangerous rocks to the soldiers behind steel that will hold a rocket propelled grenade out.. Poor Israel. It has to defend its policies of occupation and starvation... In a 60+ year OCCUPATION of land.. Of course it never occurs to anyone to just acknowledge the Palestinian state according to the UN resolution and have the upper ground and really DEFEND, instead of staying without official borders to usurp more and more land like the Golan Heights or the Gaza Strip and the West bank...
"Perhaps you share Ahmadinejad's wish that Israel be wiped off the face of the earth. "
More propaganda Claire.. He said that the ISRAELI REGIME had to be wiped of the face of the Earth.
I do think he has a good point there. But doesn't go far enough.
I think EVERY regime should be wiped of the face of the Earth.
"Why is that, given that Israel is the only liberal democracy in the region? I thought you valued freedom."
Yes, but not only for the Israeli's. And the world agrees. The thorn of Injustice is sticking in this world, and the world knows who doesn't want to remove it and why it wants to keep it there.. Eretz Israel is more then a conspiracy, and that comes from the horses mouth.
Oh, btw, even Israeli's don't agree with your ZIONIST viewpoints/propaganda Claire.
And noticing your intelligence on other subjects in other posts on BTM, you are not writing out of ignorance but on purpose FOR the ignorant, especially to keep 'm that way, as mushrooms.. Fed BS and keep them in the dark..
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1098187.html
"The undercurrent of racism in this year's election campaign was a clear warning. Overtly anti-Israeli Arab legislation and bills aimed at curbing Arab freedom of expression have soiled the concept of a Jewish state to a nadir that Israel's worst, most energetic enemies have never managed to approach.
The outpouring of hatred has since become an equal-opportunity sewer. Radical settlers and immigrants from the former Soviet Union have voiced unabashed, despicable racist attitudes toward a black president of the United States.
Inevitably, fellow Jews in Israel have become targets of the hatred as well. In Jerusalem, Jews who presume to be the among the most devout of all adherents to Judaism, think nothing of attacking fellow Jews on the Sabbath with cinder blocks and glass bottles, all in protest over the opening of a parking lot.
Rabbis in the West Bank give Israel's enemies new ammunition week to week, by condoning killings of Palestinians. "
Yeah, it is such a loving democracy...
What did you say "respect for human life"
Hmm Palestinians must not be considered Human life according to some... I read that is the "Talmud" Conspiracy.
And you know, if you don't know it, it is just lies from the Internet.
And without internet, we wouldn't even have known about McKinneys abduction in International waters.
And that should make you think how TIGHT the control over the MSM and the Governments really IS.
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
>>"I think EVERY regime should be wiped of the face of the Earth."
Ahmadinejad obviously doesn't think so. He loves regimes, chiefly his own. It's not the "regime" part he has a problem with, it's the "Israel" part. Maybe he doesn't want to kill all Israelis, but he most certainly wants to see an end to the state of Israel. He doesn't want to see Israel coexist peacefully with Palestine. In fact, he doesn't want Israel to exist at all. I think he has made that really clear. It is also particularly clear now exactly why he is so hostile to liberal democracy-- it is a direct threat to his power.
Look, I think the US needs to stop supporting Israel. That is not a legitimate use of our tax dollars. But I have a lot of sympathy for most Israelis because they are basically peaceful reasonable people (with the exception of a minority of aggressive settlers and religious zealots). Maybe a lot of Palestinians are peaceful too-- but certainly not the majority of them who supported Hamas, knowing full well of Hamas' violent agenda. I feel bad for the Palestinians who did not support Hamas, and who desire to live peacefully next to Israel, but it's the Hamas supporters rather than the Israelis who are to blame for their suffering.
>>"Hmm Palestinians must not be considered Human life according to some"
Really? Would you rather be a Palestinian citizen in Tel Aviv or an Israeli citizen in Gaza? Let's talk honestly about who does not value every human life equally. When was the last time an Israeli terrorist detonated himself on a crowded Palestinian bus? Palestinians in Israel may have lost a lot of their rights recently, but that is only because, unfortunately, since the violence and terrorist attacks have escalated in recent years every Palestinian is now considered to be a potential threat. Again, it's the violent Palestinians messing things up for everyone else. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
"Really? Would you rather be a Palestinian citizen in Tel Aviv or an Israeli citizen in Gaza? Let's talk honestly about who does not value every human life equally."
"Charges dropped against settler filmed shooting Palestinians
By Ofra Edelman, Haaretz Correspondent
Tags: Settlers, Israel News, Hebron
The State Prosecution said Tuesday that it was dropping charges against a resident of Kiryat Arba who was caught on film shooting at two Palestinians in the West Bank last December.
The prosecution said it made the decision not to try Ze'ev Braude because such a move could expose classified information that might harm the security of the state.
Braude, 51, was filmed by the human rights group B'Tselem opening fire on the Palestinians at close range during the evacuation of a disputed house in Hebron. He was initially charged with intending to cause grievous bodily harm.
Advertisement
Following the indictment, Defense Minister Ehud Barak signed off on a document guaranteeing immunity concerning sources of information for the Shin Bet, its modus operandi and the units and personnel operating within the framework of the organization.
Braude's attorney Ariel Atari requested that the court instruct the State Prosecution to reveal the secret evidence in order to help Braude's defense.
The prosecution argued that revealing the information would harm state security and added that if obligated to reveal the information, it would drop the charges against Braude. "
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1100122.html
Ich bin ein Berliner UND ein Palestinian!
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
I don't know the circumstances of the case. It sounds like the gunman was being forcibly removed from what he considered to be his home, and it seems pretty clear that the Palestinians he allegedly shot at were not injured. Was the gunman shooting to hit the men, or was he just attempting to chase them away? -- all of this should be determined in a court of law, and it is most definitely wrong that he is not at least going to be tried.
That being said, if I had to choose, I would still much rather be a Palestinian in Tel Aviv than an Israeli in Gaza City. Wouldn't you? Palestinians living in Tel Aviv get food, housing, medical treatment, and enjoy a good standard of living compared to Palestinians in Gaza. All an Israeli in Gaza would get is a bullet in the head.
Sure, Israel has cut off access to and from Gaza and that is a hardship for the Palestinians in Gaza-- but what do you expect? If a neighboring state were launching bombs at your country and sending suicide bombers to blow up your civilians, wouldn't you want to prevent the people of that state from crossing your border? Like I said, if Palestinians want peace and prosperity in Gaza, if they want any land in the West Bank, they have to stop attacking Israel, and to stay peaceful for a couple of years to show that they really mean it this time. Once Israelis are convinced that Palestinians mean them no harm, they will accept a 2 state solution. It's up to the residents of Gaza to just stop their attacks if they want peace or land.
"who was caught on film shooting at two Palestinians in the West Bank last December."
Contra
"It sounds like the gunman was being forcibly removed from what he considered to be his home,"
You mean like "his" home in the West Bank?
You mean, like "his" claim of a home in one of the ILLEGAL settlements?
So we have a CRIMINAL stealing land, during an ILLEGAL Occupation, then shooting people..
Yeah, Sure sounds like property and life are cherished there.. (By some people.)
"Sure, Israel has cut off access to and from Gaza and that is a hardship for the Palestinians in Gaza-- but what do you expect?"
I expect Israel to LEAVE the Occupied Territories, and to DEFINE its BORDERS according to treaties it has signed and also got a UN seat pending on that.... How about that?
"Like I said, if Palestinians want peace and prosperity in Gaza, if they want any land in the West Bank, they have to stop attacking Israel, and to stay peaceful for a couple of years to show that they really mean it this time."
If the Palestinians ( I notice that you DO ACKNOWLEGE them as Palestinians and not as Jordanians.) want peace, they have to get the Israelis to drop their Eretz Israel Dream, that basically claims that they live on Israeli (God given to the "choosen People {Their own claim.} )land and should "leave" and they are not the only ones, needless to say, all politcies since the founding of Israel point in this direction of getting to the point of Eretz Israel.
"The past leaders of our movement left us a clear message to keep Eretz Israel from the Sea to the River Jordan for future generations, for the mass aliya (=Jewish immigration), and for the Jewish people, all of whom will be gathered into this country."
-- Former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir declares at a Tel Aviv memorial service for former Likud leaders, November 1990. Jerusalem Domestic Radio Service. from http://www.monabaker.com/quotes.htm
Map : http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/greater-israel-maps....
"It's up to the residents of Gaza to just stop their attacks if they want peace or land."
Oh "attacking" It seems David Ben Gurion says you are a lier :
"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.
Yeah I catch the drift of what you are saying and your advice to them, lie down and die peacefully, while we destroy anything of value you might have, or that will sustain your life independently, or die by applied force resisting our grab of your recources by any means nessecary, if needed by claims that you attack us.
And you are sure, that you would want to "defend" that?
Now you may claim that the Americans did the same to the natives of America.. But do REMEBER that is a couple of HUNDREDS of YEARS ago.
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
>>"You mean like "his" home in the West Bank?"
No, I said "What he CONSIDERED to be his home". I am not siding with the settler, or saying that Israelis in the settlements in question had a right to use the land there to build their homes on. I'm just saying that the case should have gone to court so that all the facts of it could be clear.
>>"I expect Israel to LEAVE the Occupied Territories, and to DEFINE its BORDERS according to treaties it has signed and also got a UN seat pending on that.... How about that?"
And don't you understand that Israelis are prepared to do exactly that as soon as they can be assured that Palestinians will abide by their ceasefire agreements? That they won't use their newly gained ground as a base from which to launch new attacks, like they did with Gaza? Why can't the Palestinians just stop attacking Israel for long enough to demonstrate their good will and their ability to govern themselves properly (2 years of peaceful coexistence would no doubt be enough), so that the treaties can be honored?
Again, don't get me wrong-- I'm not siding with the Israeli settlers; they are a big part of the problem and they need to leave the areas they are in illegally. It's just that I don't see why you are so supportive of Hamas and the terrorists who bomb civilians in Israeli cities. I'm glad, at least, that you acknowledge that Israel has a right to exist in peace, but your hostile attitude toward the only liberal democracy in the area, a country that could easily be counted on to live up to it's promises if it weren't under such constant duress, and your simultaneous endorsement of totalitarian regimes like the one in Iran, really puzzles me.
"What he CONSIDERED to be his home"
Yeah, I got the point, "Like a bank robber, claiming it is his money."
"And don't you understand that Israelis are prepared to do exactly that as soon as they can be assured that Palestinians will abide by their ceasefire agreements?"
I notice you don't read very well, but manage to cherry pick posts.
Their ceasefire dictate = LIE DOWN AND DIE, or Resist and die, Take whatever choice, as long as you DIE. As alternative you can leave.
But since so many Palestinians are shot dead, especially young people, show one law case where some Israeli settler got convicted for MURDER on a Palestinian and received a decent acceptable sentence for such CRIME.. I know you can do your homework of proving your claim of respect for human life and stuff. If you can't then accept that MURDER of Palestinians is accepted by the state as a POLICY.
"It's just that I don't see why you are so supportive of Hamas and the terrorists who bomb civilians in Israeli cities"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/15/israeli-soldiers-human-shiel...
Criminals, Victims and Innocents.
I will NEVER be on the side of Criminals. Even if they have the LAW manipulated to their side and Manipulated the Media to only show their point of view...
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
Israel recently convicted an Israeli terrorist accused of attacking Palestinians with an 8 year sentence, even though he had cooperated and given information about his organization. In the past Israel has given life sentences to Israelis who committed acts of terror against Palestinians. Israel also recently released 197 Palestinians convicted of various crimes, including terrorist acts against Israelis.
If Israeli soldiers use Palestinian civilians as human shields, that is bad, however there are at least laws in Israel against doing that. But Palestinians deliberately target Israeli citizens, and killing Israeli non-combattants is the basic policy and strategy of Hamas. That is much worse, in my opinion. At least Israel's policy is to try and limit Palestinian civilian casualties-- and with the world scrutinizing it's every move, Israel really has no interest in deviating from that policy.
Your suggestion that Israel is deliberately committing genocide, as opposed to defending itself against attack, is ridiculous. If they are committing genocide, why would they allow 20% of their population which is Arab, to live and grow peacefully within their borders? Why did they hand over Gaza in the first place, if they didn't want Palestinians to have a state of their own? They wouldn't be killing ANY Palestinians if the Palestinians had not attacked Israel. I am convinced that most Israelis, as well as their government, would gladly embrace a 2 state solution to this dispute over land, if only they could be assured that the Palestinian terrorist attacks would cease.
Lets put that through the backward Orwellian translater.
"Israel recently convicted an Israeli terrorist accused of attacking Palestinians with an 8 year sentence, even though he had cooperated and given information about his organization. In the past Israel has given life sentences to Israelis who committed acts of terror against Palestinians. Israel also recently released 197 Palestinians convicted of various crimes, including terrorist acts against Israelis."
"Who is really, in Sharon’s words, “under terror”? It is an unfortunate but well-documented fact that Israel’s bloody record of terrorism against Palestinians far outweighs the scale of the tragic atrocity that occurred on Saturday. From the inception of the Zionist State to the present day, terrorism has been built into the foundations of policy of Israel’s military institutions. We should start, naturally, at the beginning. One authoritative source for understanding the genocidal essence of Israeli military policy comes from within Israel itself - the Israeli military historian Aryeh Yitzakhi, Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Eretz Yisrael Studies at Bar Ilan University (Tel Aviv) and Senior Lecturer in Military History in Israeli Defence Force (IDF) courses for army officers. Yitzahki is particularly qualified in this area due to his in-depth acquaintance with IDF archives, on which his conclusions are based. In the 1960s, Yitzakhi served as director of the IDF archives within the framework of his IDF service in his capacity as historian. “The time has come,” he observes, “to face the ocean of lies in which we were brought up. In almost every conquered village in the War of Independence, acts were committed, which are defined as war crimes, such as indiscriminate killings, massacres and rapes…
“For many Israelis it was easier to find consolation in the lie, that the Arabs left the country under orders from their leaders. This is an absolute fabrication. The fundamental cause of their flight was their fear from Israeli retribution and this fear was not at all imaginary. From almost each report in the IDF archives concerning the conquest of Arab villages between May and July 1948 - when clashes with Arab villagers were the fiercest - a smell of massacre emanates. Sometimes the report tells about blatant massacres which were committed after the battle, sometimes the massacres are committed in the heat of battle and while the villages are ‘cleansed’. Some of my colleagues, such as Me’ir Pa’il, don’t consider such acts as massacres. In my opinion there is no other term for such acts than massacres. This was at the time the rule of the game… In the first phase a village was usually subjected to heavy artillery from distance. Then soldiers would assault the village. After giving up resistance, the Arab fighters would withdraw while attempting to snipe at the advancing forces. Some would not flee and would remain in the village, mainly women and old people. In the course of cleansing we used to hit them. One was ‘tailing the fugitives’, as it used to be called (‘mezanvim baborchim’)… In a typical battle report about the conquest of a village we find: ‘We cleansed a village, shot in any direction where resistance was noticed. After the resistance ended, we also had to shoot people so that they would leave or who looked dangerous’.” [1]
This grim record of acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinian population is corroborated by authoritative Israeli military historian Professor Uri Milstein. Milstein, however, goes even further than Yitzhaki in his conclusions about Zionist killings of Palestinians:
“If Yitzhaki claims that almost in every village there were murders, then I maintain that even before the establishment of the State, each battle ended with a massacre. In all Israel’s wars massacres were committed but I have no doubt that the War of Independence was the dirtiest of them all.”[2]
These policies of terrorism have continued consistently throughout the existence of the Zionist State, including during the current Intifadah. We can glean an understanding of these policies by considering the authoritative report of Giorgio Giacomelli, an independent rapporteur mandated by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to monitor the Occupied Territories. The UN investigator found that “the scale of [Israel’s] violation is unprecedented. It is worthy of note that the number of deaths caused by Israeli forces so far approximate the number killed in the first four months of the intifada, in 1987-88.” Israeli forces “appear to have indiscriminately used excessive force in cases where there was no imminent threat to their lives,” according to Giacomelli, who met Palestinian Authority representatives, Palestinian and Israeli non-governmental organizations, international organizations, human rights monitors, medical professionals, and some wounded. “Whether in cases of Israel Defense Forces or Israeli police actions, deadly force is used without warning, and without employing deterrence or gradual measures consistent with the minimum standards and methods of crowd control or management of civil unrest.” The report also found that about 40 percent of Palestinians wounded by Israeli occupation forces were under age 18, and that at least half of the injuries resulted from the use of live ammunition.[3]
An extensive investigation by The Village Voice based on “more than 100 interviews [with] patients, doctors, and medical personnel in 14 hospitals and clinics in Jordan and the West Bank” similarly found that: “With no shooting from the Palestinian side, and often little or no use of tear gas to disperse the protests, Israeli soldiers have repeatedly fired live ammunition into unarmed crowds.” Consequently, “Thousands of Palestinian young men and boys may become permanently crippled from bullet wounds suffered during the last five months of stone-throwing protests against Israeli rule.” Many of the thousands of injuries “came when unarmed people were shot.” But CNN and most of the rest of the media don’t give a damn about these thousands of injured Palestinian children. Because Israel is the perpetrator, it doesn’t make the news.
Amnesty International concluded in its October 2000 report that: “The Israeli security services were almost invariably well-defended, located at a distance from demonstrators in good cover, in blockhouses, behind wire or well-protected by riot shields.” The pretext for the use of lethal force, Amnesty found, was simply a fabrication. “Certainly, stones—or even petrol bombs—cannot be said to have endangered the lives of Israeli security services in any of the instances examined by Amnesty International.” One Israeli sniper privately revealed that soldiers are permitted to shoot at Palestinians who pose a potential threat, as long as they appear to be over the age of 12. “Twelve and up is allowed,” he confessed. A senior IDF officer also admitted: “Nobody can convince me we didn’t needlessly kill dozens of children.”[4]
So the IDF itself admits that it has been involved in acts of terrorism by murdering dozens of innocent, defenceless Palestinian children on a routine basis - but CNN does not consider the fact fit to be aired. But still, it is primarily Israel that is “under terror”, as a matter of principle.
The daily reality of Israeli terrorism in the Palestinian territories that continue to be illegally occupied by Israeli forces and settlers in violation of hundreds of UN resolutions, has been corroborated again and again by international observers. In the most recent report by Human Rights Watch, focusing on Hebron District as a case study, the American rights monitor found that:
“… a leading source of human rights abuse in Hebron is the excessive use of lethal force by Israeli security forces in clashes with Palestinian demonstrators, many of whom are unarmed and pose no dire threat to the Israeli security personnel, or anybody else… Many of the Palestinians who have been killed or hurt by IDF fire in the vicinity of demonstrations were pedestrians - this fact conveys a hint that some IDF soldiers have fired indiscriminately in populated areas.”[5]
To understand the extent of Israel’s reign of terror in the Occupied Territories, it is essential not only to take note of the rapidly growing number of dead, but also the number and nature of injuries. We should refer to the breakdown of casualties on merely two days near the beginning of the Intifadah by the prolific Israeli commentator Professor Tanya Reinhart of Tel Aviv University, a regular contributor to the Israeli daily Yediot Ahranot:
“By afternoon that day [Friday 3 November 2000] there were 276 people injured (LAW report, Nov 3), and by the final count ‘Up to 452 Palestinians were hurt on Friday across the territories, according to the Red Crescent’ (Ha’aretz, Nov 5). On Saturday, October 4th, as the media covers in great length of Barak’s ‘plea to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to return to the negotiating table and stop the Palestinian-Israeli bloodshed for the sake of peace’ (AP), ‘another 153 were treated for injuries sustained in clashes with Israeli troops’ ('ha'aretz'), including ‘5 school children from Sa’ir (near Hebron) who are in extremely critical condition’ (ADDAMEER – Prisoners’ Support and Human Rights Association, Nov 4.)” [6]
Professor Tanya Reinhart also points out that Israeli policies of terror result in a stable average of about five Palestinian casualties a day. But CNN, like almost everyone else in the media, isn’t interested in covering these horrifying acts of terrorism by Israeli forces against Palestinians, that far outweigh even Saturday’s suicide attack. Because principle dictates that only Israel can be “under terror”."
http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq22.html
This human tragedy compels us to examine the Israeli rationale of "security," a rubric that has covered a curiously large number of Israeli violations of international law and human rights, recently and in the past. Why, we must ask, does Israel in the West Bank and Gaza Strip close universities, shoot students in classrooms and on the street, deport leaders, dismiss mayors, create colonial settlements and encourage terrorist acts by settlers all in the name of' "security?". Why, when confronted with massive popular resistance to its occupation of South Lebanon, did Israel react with the same "Iron Fist," initiating raids on villages, mass arrests of civilians, wide-scale destruction of homes and property, and assassinations even though this policy could only further alienate the population."
The personal diary of Moshe Sharett sheds light on this question by amply documenting the rationale and mechanics of lsrael's "Arab policy" in the late 1940s and the 1950s. The policy portrayed, in its most intimate particulars, is one of deliberate Israeli acts of provocation, intended to generate Arab hostility and thus to create pretexts for armed action and territorial expansion. Sharett's records document this policy of "sacred terrorism" and expose the myths of Israel's "security needs" and the "Arab threat" that have been treated like self-evident truths from the creation of Israel to the present, when Israeli terrorism against Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and against Palestinians and Lebanese in South Lebanon, has reached an intolerable level. It is becoming increasingly evident that the exceptional demographic and geographic alterations in Israeli society within the present generation have been brought about, not as the accidental results of the endeavor to guard "Israel's security" against an "Arab threat," but by a drive for lebensraum.
8<-.-.->8
The undisguised satisfaction that the maiming of the two Palestinian mayors evoked among many Jewish settlers in the West Bank is reminiscent of the feeling in Israel in the 1950s that caused Sharett so much anguish, and challenged his conscience. In fact, the private armies now being organized by Jewish vigilante groups determined to keep the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip under permanent Israeli control, have openly advocated the removal of all Arabs from occupied Palestine. Although these ultra-nationalists consider former Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir (former members of the terrorist Irgun and Stern gangs)
8<-.-.->8
The more the world tries to understand the situation in the Middle East,the more the Zionist organizations in the United States, acting in concert with Israel, try to fog it up. lsrael's wars against the Arabs in 1967 and 1982 obliterated its David image and confirmed it as the Goliath of the Middle East. No longer was it possible for the Israeli government to escape public scrutiny, despite all the immunity which it enjoys in the American public arena, as its forces, in the name of "security" for Israeli civilians, carried out the most ruthless aerial bombardment since Vietnam.The U.S. ambassador in Lebanon, whose government used its Security Council veto to protest lsrael's war gains in 1982, described their saturation bombing: "There is no pinpoint accuracy against targets in open spaces." The Canadian ambassador said lsrael's bombing "would make Berlin of 1944 look like a tea party. . it is truly a scene from Dante's Inferno." NBC's John Chancellor said: "I kept thinking of the bombing of Madrid during the Spanish Civil War. ..we are now dealing with an imperial Israel." Indeed, in their pure murderousness, given the frequent use of phosphorus and cluster bombs, the Israeli bombings of Beirut, an advanced form of state terrorism, far outstripped the attacks on Guernica, Coventry and Dresden.
http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/essays/rokach.html
Propaganda Claire. You got to do a tad better then that.
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
>>"From the inception of the Zionist State to the present day, terrorism has been built into the foundations of policy of Israel’s military institutions."
So you DON'T acknowledge Israel's right to exist. I assumed you did. My mistake. I can only assume that the rest of what you posted is colored by that prejudice.
The idea that Israelis use an unreasonable amount of force against poor defenseless Palestinians merely throwing rocks is a myth. Here is a video of a Palestinian munitions factory where they make those "rocks" they "throw" at Israelis:
http://therevolutionscript.blogspot.com/2008/08/inner-workings-of-palest...
Here's another that shows the kind of education those "children" are getting (There are no doubt really children under 18 being trained in this way, which is of course tragic for the children, but it's a far bigger indictment of the Jihadists than of the Israelis):
http://therevolutionscript.blogspot.com/2008/10/palestinian-freedom-figh...
Those look more like machine guns than rocks to me. And by the way, check out the website these videos are from... Crazy stuff!
"My mistake. I can only assume that the rest of what you posted is colored by that prejudice."
No prejustice here Claire. Only if there is a victim, then the prejustice IS that JUSTICE needs to be served.
And your assumptions well you know what they say about assumptions.
As the article states: "Zionist State to the present day, terrorism has been built into the foundations of policy of Israel’s military institutions."
As a contra to the propaganda you are spewing about life respecting, property honoring, and what was it, most liberal democracy of the middle east.
And right to exist....
Everyone has a right to peacefully exist, as much as they grant that right to others.
Deviating from that right for others is politics ie lies and murder for some gain.
Now you may want to put blinds in front of peoples eyes, by painting pictures that are distorted by reality.
As the article states, most proles are kept ignorant of reality by the illusions they are given, IF they are given information at all. And you, well we both know about you. Because I KNOW you are not dumb, so you have the intelligence to recognise the truth and to put it in a bigger picture. You don't, and that shows your agenda who is opposite of mine.
Respectfully, you can have the last word.
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
When was the last time an Israeli terrorist detonated himself on a crowded Palestinian bus?
I don't know to much of the beginning of Israel, but stories are out about their terrorist activities at that time.
Maybe you could tell some more about those against the British when Palestine was still a British Mandate.
You mean the last time the Zionists did a false flag in New York with some airplanes?
A Zionist destroyed his property by blowing it up (pulling it.)
Some Zionists had "prophetised" it as a new Pearl Harbor?
You mean that way in the current times?
--
Don't Think, Act!
Don't Question, Follow!
And don't bother telling an enraged lynch mob with a raging bloodlust, the truth.
( my two cents )
U.S. Govt. Threatens to Prosecute Waterboarding ++ click here ++
by David Swanson
We learn about ongoing torture by the government all the time, and we're told all the time that torture is no longer official policy, and yet in neither type of story is there ever any suggestion that the laws against torture might be enforced, now or in the future. In the government's view, torture must be less safe when performed without the benefit of government resources, doctors, lawyers, psychologists, videographers, and vice presidents. However, street demonstrations of waterboarding have yet to produce a single corpse to add to the pile produced by official U.S. government torture.
Other crimes in Washington are also crimes if you or I commit them, but not if someone else does. When a group of us ordinary citizens spoke against the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine in the lobby of a senate office building on January 6th of this year (video) we were hauled off to jail. Bill Moyers' Journal covered the story (video). But when tourist groups are spoken to by senators in the same lobby, no crime occurs (video). I'm not talking about the people who hung banners from the balconies, or the passersby who cheered. I'm talking about those of us who stood and read the names of the dead. Seventeen of us (including some who hung banners) were arrested. Some of us paid a fine. On Monday, four face prosecution for unlawful assembly even though freedom of assembly is guaranteed in the Constitution, while warrantless wiretapping -- just to pick one example of ongoing government crimes -- is banned by the Constitution.
The greatest hypocrisy is not that tour groups can make noise whereas citizens with a political message cannot. The greatest hypocrisy is not that our president is speaking up for protesters as long as they are in Iran, while the Pentagon considers protesting to constitute "low level terrorism" when practiced within the United States. The greatest hypocrisy is that laws are being enforced while the most important laws and the most egregious violations are being ignored as a matter of loudly announced principle. When Laurie Arbeiter, Robbie Diesu, Michelle Grise, and Pete Perry appear in court on Monday they will not be able to ask the judge to stop looking backward, even though their "crimes" occurred in January. They will not be able to accuse the judge of petty vengeance for his or her refusal to "look forward." They will be compelled to face the question of whether they violated a law. (Never mind that the Capitol Police arrested us and then figured out hours later something they could most plausibly charge us with.)
Meanwhile, Dick Cheney confesses to felonies every time he opens his mouth, a civil suit against John Yoo has produced a 42-page order that could easily serve as an indictment, and the families our drones keep bombing in Afghanistan could never be persuaded that reading the names of the dead is the most serious crime that has occurred. The House has impeached a judge for groping despite his already having been convicted in court. But another judge responsible for torture is permitted to continue ruling on cases.
Fascinating.
average joe